Kingston and The July 22 Run-Off! Obama Ear Protector!

Any thoughts?

If true just another reason why big and distant government generally fails.

Ever since The Department of Education was begun education in this nation has declined.

Close it down and let the states have their money back instead of laundering it through D.C. in order to employ useless bureaucrats and let each state offer the kind of education they deem best for their young citizens. (See 1 below.)
===
My candidate for The Senate is picking up endorsements from former opponents and is now leading in the polls for his run-off.  Jack Kingston is best suited to run against Michelle Nunn, who is married but chooses not to use her married name. She also danced around the question put to her whether she would have voted for Obamacare and has not been battle tested because she has had a free run. I continue to contend that a vote for her is a vote to keep Harry Reid in his position of Senator Obstructionist!

Again, I am sure she is a lovely young lady but we already have seen what an inexperienced  community organizer can do to wreck a nation and she has little to commend her except Chairing former President Bush's Points of Light Organization, which was laughed at by Liberals when he proposed and started it. (See 2 below.)
===
Some information re the Ga. Run-off , July 22:  "Because the state of Georgia  conducts an “open” primary, voters on Tuesday were able to pick their choice of ballots regardless of any political affiliation. Not so for the runoff. As a voter, you must stick with the party ballot you choose for the main primary (in other words, you can’t cast a Democratic ballot in the main primary and then vote in a Republican runoff). However, if you did not vote in the primary, you may vote in the runoff in the party of your choice."
===

As I recently wrote, Obama likes to set up to unrealistic and false hypotheticals and then place his argument  in the middle in order to appear sensitive and rational.  It is a neat and clever but a disingenuous form of subtle propaganda.  (See 3 below.)
===
Dick
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)The following was written by Terry Jeffery May 9, 2014

The public schools in Washington, D.C., spent $29,349 per pupil in the 2010-2011 school year, according to the latest data from National Center for Education Statistics, but in 2013 fully 83 percent of the eighth graders in these schools were not "proficient" in reading and 81 percent were not "proficient" in math. 

These are the government schools in our nation's capital city -- where for decades politicians of both parties have obstreperously pushed for more federal involvement in education and more federal spending on education.

Government has manifestly failed the families who must send their children to these schools, and the children who must attend them.

Under the auspices of the National Center for Education Statistics, the federal government periodically tests elementary and high school students in various subjects, including reading and math. These National Assessment of Educational Progress tests are scored on a scale of 500, and student achievement levels are rated as "basic," "proficient" and "advanced."

In 2013, students nationwide took NAEP reading and math tests. When the NCES listed the scores of public-school eighth graders in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, D.C. came in last in both subjects.

D.C. eighth graders scored an average of 248 out of 500 in reading, and Mississippi finished next to last with an average of 253.

Only 17 percent of D.C. 8th graders rated "proficient" or better in reading. In Mississippi, it was 20 percent.

In math, D.C. public-school eighth graders scored an average of 265 out of 500, and only 19 percent were rated "proficient" or better. Alabama placed next to last with an average math score of 269, with 20 percent rated "proficient" or better.

Some might argue it is unfair to compare, Washington, D.C., a single city, with an entire state. 

However, D.C. also does not compete well against other big cities.

The Department of Education's Trial Urban District Assessments program compares the test results in 21 large-city school districts, including Washington, D.C.

In these assessments, the scores of students from charter schools were removed and the average reading score for D.C. public school eighth-graders dropped to 245. That was below the national large-city average of 258, and tied D.C. with Fresno for seventeenth place among the 21 big cities in the TUDA.

In math, minus the charter school students, D.C. public-school eighth graders earned an average score of 260. That was below the national large-city average of 276, and put D.C. in a tie for sixteenth place, this time with Fresno and Baltimore.

The NCES database indicates that in the 2010-2011 school year, Washington, D.C. public schools spent a total of $29,349 per pupil, ranking No. 1 in spending per pupil among the 21 large cities in the TUDA.

New York City Public Schools ranked second among these large cities, spending $23,996 per pupil. That was $5,353 -- or about 18 percent -- less than the $29,349 the D.C. public schools spent.

Table 236.75 from the NCES's Digest of Education Statistics compares per pupil spending among the states and the District of Columbia. It indicates that D.C. spent a little bit less per pupil -- $28,403 -- who enrolled in the fall in 2010-2011 school year. But that still ranks D.C. as No. 1, out-spending all the states.

How did the D.C. public schools spend $28,403 per student?

Among other things, they spent $10,584 per pupil on "instruction," which "encompasses all activities dealing directly with the interaction between teachers and students."

Then they spent $5,487 on "capital outlays," which includes "the acquisition of land and buildings; building construction, remodeling," etc.

Then they spent $2,321 on "operation and maintenance," which includes "salary, benefits, supplies, and contractual fees for supervision of operations and maintenance," etc.

Then they spent $2,124 on "interest on school debt."

Then they spent $1,613 on "instructional staff," $1,546 on "school administration," $1,404 on "student transportation," $1,208 on "student support," $866 on "general administration," $761 on "food services," $450 on "other support services."Congress ought to give every family in Washington, D.C., a choice of whether or not they want a government school to spend this money on behalf of their children. The D.C. public school system should be required to provide every family in the district with school-age children with a voucher for each child that is worth every penny the district now spends per pupil in its public schools. Families should be able to use that voucher at any school they want, anywhere they want.

The latest attempt at centralized control of all the country's schools by D.C. and the unions is something called "Common Core", one of the last nails in the educational coffin of our children.

In today's America you can drive at 16 and vote at 18, neither of which requires a high school diploma!

 The public schools in Washington, D.C., spent $29,349 per pupil in the 2010-2011 school year, according to the latest data from National Center for Education Statistics, but in 2013 fully 83 percent of the eighth graders in these schools were not "proficient" in reading and 81 percent were not "proficient" in math.

These are the government schools in our nation's capital city -- where for decades politicians of both parties have obstreperously pushed for more federal involvement in education and more federal spending on education. 

Government has manifestly failed the families who must send their children to these schools, and the children who must attend them. 

Under the auspices of the National Center for Education Statistics, the federal government periodically tests elementary and high school students in various subjects, including reading and math. These National Assessment of Educational Progress tests are scored on a scale of 500, and student achievement levels are rated as "basic," "proficient" and "advanced."

In 2013, students nationwide took NAEP reading and math tests. When the NCES listed the scores of public-school eighth graders in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, D.C. came in last in both subjects. 

D.C. eighth graders scored an average of 248 out of 500 in reading, and Mississippi finished next to last with an average of 253.

Only 17 percent of D.C. 8th graders rated "proficient" or better in reading. In Mississippi, it was 20 percent. 

In math, D.C. public-school eighth graders scored an average of 265 out of 500, and only 19 percent were rated "proficient" or better. Alabama placed next to last with an average math score of 269, with 20 percent rated "proficient" or better. 

Some might argue it is unfair to compare, Washington, D.C., a single city, with an entire state. However, D.C. also does not compete well against other big cities. 

The Department of Education's Trial Urban District Assessments program compares the test results in 21 large-city school districts, including Washington, D.C. 

In these assessments, the scores of students from charter schools were removed and the average reading score for D.C. public school eighth-graders dropped to 245. That was below the national large-city average of 258, and tied D.C. with Fresno for seventeenth place among the 21 big cities in the TUDA. 

In math, minus the charter school students, D.C. public-school eighth graders earned an average score of 260. That was below the national large-city average of 276, and put D.C. in a tie for sixteenth place, this time with Fresno and Baltimore. 

The NCES database indicates that in the 2010-2011 school year, Washington, D.C. public schools spent a total of $29,349 per pupil, ranking No. 1 in spending per pupil among the 21 large cities in the TUDA. 

New York City Public Schools ranked second among these large cities, spending $23,996 per pupil. That was $5,353 -- or about 18 percent -- less than the $29,349 the D.C. public schools spent. 

Table 236.75 from the NCES's Digest of Education Statistics compares per pupil spending among the states and the District of Columbia. It indicates that D.C. spent a little bit less per pupil -- $28,403 -- who enrolled in the fall in 2010-2011 school year. But that still ranks D.C. as No. 1, out-spending all the states. 

How did the D.C. public schools spend $28,403 per student?

Among other things, they spent $10,584 per pupil on "instruction," which "encompasses all activities dealing directly with the interaction between teachers and students."

Then they spent $5,487 on "capital outlays," which includes "the acquisition of land and buildings; building construction, remodeling," etc.

Then they spent $2,321 on "operation and maintenance," which includes "salary, benefits, supplies, and contractual fees for supervision of operations and maintenance," etc.

Then they spent $2,124 on "interest on school debt."

Then they spent $1,613 on "instructional staff," $1,546 on "school administration," $1,404 on "student transportation," $1,208 on "student support," $866 on "general administration," $761 on "food services," $450 on "other support services." 

Congress ought to give every family in Washington, D.C., a choice of whether or not they want a government school to spend this money on behalf of their children. The D.C. public school system should be required to provide every family in the district with school-age children with a voucher for each child that is worth every penny the district now spends per pupil in its public schools. Families should be able to use that voucher at any school they want, anywhere they want.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) Dear Dick and Lynn:

I am thrilled and proud to receive the endorsement of former candidate for Senate, Karen Handel!

Karen Handel has become a leader in the conservative movement and was the first elected Republican Secretary of State in Georgia. In endorsing my campaign, Karen said that I am “the conservative choice for U.S. Senate.”

Like me, Karen is a precinct-level Republican who has never been too good to put out yard signs, stuff envelopes, or make phone calls on behalf of conservative candidates. We have both been in the trenches and voted in Republican primaries long before our names were ever on the ballot.

The Republican primary runoff is only 54 days away and your help is imperative to getting our message to voters in all corners of Georgia. Please click here to chip in today.

Sincerely,

Jack Kingston

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3) Doubling Down on a Muddled Foreign Policy

The president has somehow managed to combine the worst features of isolationism and multilateralism.

By John Bolton

At West Point on Wednesday, President Obama told the graduating seniors that he had discovered a middle way in foreign policy between isolationism and military interventionism. To the White House, this was like "the dawn come up like thunder outer China," in Kipling's phrase.

Others were less impressed, especially since it took five-plus years of on-the-job training to grasp this platitude. Of course the United States has options between war and complete inaction. Not since Nixon has a president so relished uncovering middling alternatives between competing straw men.

US President Barack Obama arrives at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York to deliver the commencement address to the 2014 graduating class May 28, 2014. Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

When any president speaks, he engages in more than academic analysis. But playing with words, at which Mr. Obama excels, improves nothing in his record. Inattention to foreign threats and challenges as diverse as Islamic terrorism or China's increasing belligerence in the East Asian littoral; inconsistency and ineptitude in pursuing his own policies, as in Syria and Libya; and indecisiveness in confronting threats like Russia's pressure on Ukraine and Iran's nuclear-weapons program all hang like albatrosses around his presidential tenure. Mr. Obama's speech only further muddled the administration's contradictory messages on foreign policy.

The president's "vision" was, as the White House had promised, "both interventionist and internationalist but not isolationist or unilateralist," a formulation as sterile as the speech itself. Unilateralism vs. multilateralism and interventionism vs. noninterventionism are debates over tools, not over broad philosophies or even strategies. It is like arguing abstractly whether one favors eating with spoons or forks. An essential question must be addressed first: What is the objective? The choice of tactics and methods flows from defining the objectives, not the reverse.

The internationalist/isolationist spectrum does, however, touch on fundamental questions. While Mr. Obama has wisely chosen the "internationalist" bumper sticker for his administration, his actual policies have had strong isolationist elements. Mr. Obama has been weak and ineffectual because of his debilitating reluctance to use the wide range of assets available to advance American interests, not just because of his punctiliousness about using military force. Even as he advocated at West Point the uncontroversial notion that diplomacy and "soft power" are the preferred approaches, while holding military force in reserve, Mr. Obama's own record demonstrates neither resolute policies, nor effective diplomacy, nor a credible threat.

Consider Syria, where Mr. Obama clearly hoped to make news with his speech by announcing yet another change in policy: increased U.S. assistance for moderate opposition forces, implicitly including military training. The move comes about three years after such training might actually have made a difference. While momentum in that grinding conflict has shifted too often to be confident that anyone now has the upper hand, the Bashar Assad regime is presently stronger than at any point since hostilities began. Moreover, in today's circumstances, Americans might perversely be training terrorists who have flocked to Syria.

On Tuesday, to avoid stepping on his West Point headline, Mr. Obama announced that he would withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2016, before he leaves office. Resources "saved" thereby will be allocated to counterterrorism training in other countries, as if redistributing scarcity were a virtue. Typically, Mr. Obama made no mention of seeking "victory" in the war against terrorism, a still-foreign concept to him, in a war whose very existence he denies.

What explains Mr. Obama's too-little, too-late Syria policy? Or his determination in Afghanistan to replicate his mistake in exiting Iraq? Or his neglect of Iranian and North Korean nuclear proliferation? Or—as Yul Brynner said in "The King and I"—"et cetera, et cetera, et cetera"?

Mr. Obama has somehow managed to combine the worst features of isolationism and multilateralism.

He is isolationist in rejecting the extensive, muscular projection of American power and influence, not just militarily, but in the broadest sense of active leadership to guard or advance U.S. interests around the world. Even the president's supporters are hard-pressed to name a single piece of geography where America has increased its influence and power, let alone its security, under his leadership. (And, not coincidentally, his personal approval ratings globally are falling.)

Greater American geopolitical clout is not the president's goal. Instead, he and both of his secretaries of state have preferred multilateral agreements on climate change, greater dependence on international law (as Mr. Obama repeatedly emphasized to Vladimir Putin during the Ukraine crisis), or fruitless negotiations over Syria or Iran's nuclear-weapons program in U.N. venues like Geneva and Vienna. These are the emblems by which Mr. Obama establishes his "internationalist" bona fides.

Critically, what Mr. Obama's isolationist strain and his multilateralist strain have in common is that both envisage declining American influence. We have reduced influence because we are most emphatically doing less on our own initiative, visible in the president's propensity for studied inactivity abroad. And we have reduced influence because when we do act, we are too often caught in glacial processes that essentially guarantee that the U.S. will not achieve all its objectives. If not letting America have its own way is Mr. Obama's objective, he is an unparalleled foreign-policy success.

Mr. Bolton is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of "Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad" (Simon & Schuster, 2007)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pass The Appease Please! Small Feet All Too Often In His Mouth!

Pass the appease please? (See 1 below.)

Iran's Ayatollah sees America as the bad guy and we need to be destroyed.

From his warped view I understand where he is coming from. (See 1a below.)
===
Even The Washington Post slams Obama.  What has happened in the print world? (See 2 below.)

Has lying become acceptable?  (See 2a below.)

Another week another scandal.  In part is big government to blame?  If so, why do Liberals want bigger government?  (See 2b below.)
===

Yesterday, Obama  made a speech at West Point and set up two false straw men foreign policy concepts - withdrawal or war are the only choices Obama sees.

Since Obama has no workable foreign policy he suggested two theories no one in their right mind advocates and then opportunistically proceeded to reject them.

He did note he embraces American exceptionalism because he has been battered for his previous rejection of same.

The real choice is not between withdrawal or war but leadership and the ability to execute an effective policy that is appropriate to the challenge.  Obama has been unable to accomplish this because he is basically an incompetent standing in shoes too big for his feet which are, all too often, in his mouth.

===

Dick
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1)   Will Secret Diplomacy Seal Iran Appeasement?

By Jonathan S. Tobin 

The latest round of nuclear talks between the West and Iran ended earlier this month without the progress toward an agreement that many had anticipated. Though the United States and its allies seem eager to sign a deal that will put a fig leaf of non-proliferation on an Iranian nuclear program that they are content to leave in place, Tehran has picked up on Washington’s zeal for a deal and is doing what its negotiators have done best for over a decade: stalling. With the international sanctions regime already starting to take on water after last November’s interim agreement that loosened the economic restrictions on Iran, the Islamist regime knows it is in a far stronger position than its Western counterparts.

But rather than reacting to this dismal situation by rethinking his approach, President Obama seems determined to double down on his determination to get a deal. As the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday, the president is revisiting the tactic he used last year to revive the moribund P5+1 talks with Iran. Rather than continuing to work with his European partners, it appears the U.S. will once again leave the multilateral negotiations and conduct bilateral talks. The assumption is that on their own, American diplomats will be able to entice the Iranians to sign on the dotted line with concessions that even the French and the British wouldn’t consider. If true, this illustrates that what the president started last year with the interim deal is a process that has one goal and one goal alone: getting a deal with Iran no matter what the price.

The Iranians’ strong negotiating position stems directly from the interim agreement that was brought about as the result of secret U.S.-Iran talks. It is difficult to imagine an international community that was reluctantly dragged into enacting sanctions in the first place, raising the pressure on Iran if no deal is reached. Nor does anyone seriously imagine President Obama ordering the use of force if the talks continue to be stalemated. As a result, there is very little reason for the ayatollahs to think they have much to worry about in the talks.

Having already won the West’s acceptance of its “right” to enrich uranium, ending the Iranian nuclear program, as President Obama pledged during his reelection campaign, is off the table. The Iranians are now only negotiating about how long it would take them to “break out” from a deal and race to a bomb. At this point the only objective of the Western negotiators appears to be to lengthen that period from a few weeks to a few months, but even this victory has not lessened Iran’s determination to drag out the talks even further.

That is why the possibility of more secret talks is such a dangerous development. Though the current multilateral negotiations have created a negotiating track that has given the Iranians much of what they wanted in the talks, the open nature of these monthly talk fests make it difficult for the Americans to sweeten the pot even further for the Iranians. Since Tehran has already openly mocked requests to include their ballistic weapons program in the talks and continue to make it hard for the International Atomic Energy Agency to monitor their facilities, including their military research sites, transparency would appear to favor at least the pretense that the purpose of the negotiations is to actually stop the Iranians from getting a bomb. But secret talks offer the possibility that Obama can go even further than his partners, who have at times balked at the open desire of Washington for an end to the confrontation with Iran at almost any price.

Iran went into this process hoping that it could achieve by Western consent what it appeared it was well on its way to achieving in spite of the push for sanctions: American approval for a nuclear program that could easily be converted to military use. If, as theJournal reported today, Iran’s weapons research scientists are still hard at work at getting closer to a bomb, the margin of error for the U.S. in this process is very small. Having conceded that Iran could amass enough nuclear fuel for a bomb, it will be harder still to craft a deal that could prevent it from taking that next inevitable state to a weapon.

The Obama administration proved last fall that it could sell even a weak deal with Iran to the American public and brand skeptics as potential warmongers. It may be thinking that it can do the same with an even flimsier agreement negotiated in similar secrecy this year. If so, Obama may think he may have gotten himself off the hook for his many promises to stop the Iranians from getting a weapon. But such drives for appeasement that contain within them the seeds of future conflict rarely end well for the appeasers.

1a) Iran Supreme Leader Vows to Destroy America, Says Promoting Negotiation is Treason

Author:

 Joshua Levitt

A photo posted on Khameni's Twitter account. Photo: Twitter.

In a speech to parliament, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Sunday vowed to destroy the U.S., which he held responsible for distorting the world’s values and starting indiscriminate wars.

According to semi-official news agency Fars, Khamenei said,“Battle and jihad are endless because evil and its front continue to exist. … This battle will only end when the society can get rid of the oppressors’ front with America at the head of it, which has expanded its claws on human mind, body and thought. … This requires a difficult and lengthy struggle and need for great strides.”

He said, “Today’s world is full of thieves and plunderers of human honor, dignity and morality who are equipped with knowledge, wealth and power, and under the pretense of humanity easily commit crimes and betray human ideals and start wars in different parts of the world.”

On the question of Iran’s negotiations with world powers aimed at checking the development of its nuclear program, the Ayatollah said, “Those [Iranians] who want to promote negotiation and surrender to the oppressors and blame the Islamic Republic as a warmonger in reality commit treason.”

“The reason for continuation of this battle is not the warmongering of the Islamic Republic. Logic and reason command that for Iran, in order to pass through a region full of pirates, needs to arm itself and must have the capability to defend itself,” he said. “The accelerated scientific advancement of the last 12 years cannot stop under any circumstances.

The Ayatollah’s address to parliament was flagged by “Reza Kahlili,” the pseudonym of a former CIA operative in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards who now serves on the U.S. Task Force on National and Homeland Security and the advisory board of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, writing inThe Daily Caller.

The Ayatollah’s speech came after the fourth round of talks in Geneva ended without an agreement, and with Iran presenting its red lines, “including the expansion of research and development for its nuclear program, the need of the country to continue enrichment, and the fact that the country’s ballistic missile program — despite U.N. sanctions — is not up for negotiation,” Kahlili wrote.

“The Obama administration had hoped that with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif showing an eagerness to solve the nuclear issue and address the West’s concerns, there would be a possibility for a negotiated solution. An interim agreement penned last November in Geneva was touted as an ‘historic nuclear deal,’” Kahlili said.

“At the same time, IAEA officials met again with their Iranian counterparts last week in Tehran to discuss information on the work on detonators and needed collaboration by the regime to clear outstanding issues on its nuclear program as part of seven transparency steps Iran had agreed to fulfill by May 15, which has yet to take place,” Kahlili said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2)THE WASHINGTON POST

President Obama continues his retreat from Afghanistan

By Editorial Board,

YOU CAN’T fault President Obama for inconsistency. After winning election in 2008, he reduced the U.S. military presence in Iraq to zero. After helping to topple Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi in 2011, he made sure no U.S. forces would remain. He has steadfastly stayed aloof, except rhetorically, from the conflict in Syria. And on Tuesday he promised to withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2016.

The Afghan decision would be understandable had Mr. Obama’s previous choices proved out. But what’s remarkable is that the results also have been consistent — consistently bad. Iraq has slid into something close to civil war, with al-Qaeda retaking territory that U.S. Marines once died to liberate. In Syria, al-Qaeda has carved out safe zones that senior U.S. officials warn will be used as staging grounds for attacks against Europe and the United States. Libya is falling apart, with Islamists, secularists, military and other factions battling for control.

We hope Afghanistan can avoid that fate. But the last time the United States cut and ran from there, after the Soviet Union withdrew, the result was the Taliban takeover, al-Qaeda’s safe havens and, eventually, the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, after which everyone said, well, we won’t make that mistake again.

Mr. Obama said Tuesday that, assuming Afghanistan’s new president signs a basing agreement, the United States will keep 9,800 troops in the country next year for training and counterterrorism. This is fewer than ideal but better than the immediate “zero option” favored by some of his aides, and it will pave the way for allies to participate, too. But Mr. Obama also said the U.S. presence will shrink by half in 2015 and to zero by the time he leaves office.

For years the United States promised to be a partner to a democratic Afghanistan, to help ensure that girls can keep going to school and to lock in the gains that have been won at such a high price by U.S. and other NATO troops. Mr. Obama’s implicit message Tuesday was: “Not so much.” If al-Qaeda can wait out the United States, it may get another chance. If Afghans have thrown their lot in with the Americans, they will be left on their own.

Why commit to the zero option now? An administration official, speaking to reporters on the condition that he not be named, said it’s “necessary for planning purposes . . . for everybody to have predictability.” Given the small number of troops involved, that’s not persuasive. It may be, a year from now, that reducing the troops by half or even withdrawing them all seems a wise and prudent option. But why not examine conditions then and make a decision based on facts? Instead, an administration that faulted its predecessor for being ideological seems to have substituted ideology for reality-based foreign policy.

“Ending wars.” “Nation-building at home.” The “pivot to Asia.” These are popular and attractive slogans, and they make a lot of sense in the abstract. But they don’t necessarily bring peace to a dangerous world, and a president can’t always safely choose which dangers he would rather confront.


2a)  Obama and the Truth

By Russell Nagelkirk

Smoking gun emails have been unearthed which prove the Obama administration lied about the Benghazi attacks.  This lie was repeated.  It was compounded.  It was uttered at the United Nations General Assembly.  

Now the VA scandal has erupted revealing that the actors in the bureaucracy cooked the books…lied…to cover up wait times.  This is systemic conspiratorial lying.

The families of Americans who died in Benghazi deserve compassion.  The veterans and their families impacted by the Veteran’s Affairs scandal deserve our compassion.

The unseen victim in the rubble is the truth.  We have, as a people, forgotten that the first duty is to the truth.

Without truth there is no justice; and without justice, compassion misses its mark.  Hillary Clinton said, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” when questioned about Benghazi.  She might as well have said, “What difference does the truthmake?”  The difference is that an innocent filmmaker would not be unjustly punished for violence he didn’t cause.  The families of the dead, and We the People, would know why our own people are dead in Benghazi and who is responsible.  We could learn from it and avoid it being repeated.  We could remove the individuals in charge so that their poor judgment would not cause further damage.  Gandhi said, “Truth never damages a cause that is just.”  Imagine, if we punish the innocent and fail to punish the guilty, all because we didn’t know the truth, then our cause is damaged.  If we do not act upon the truth, then America’s voice on the public stage shall contain no inspirational moral authority.  Our allies will shrink from us.  Our enemies will feel all the more justified to destroy us.

We live in a culture that often denies truth exists and substitutes person for principle.  Many have virtually deified Barack Obama.  His resonant voice and face-to-heaven posture (as if he was anointed by the divine) sent thrills up people’s legs.

John F. Kennedy once said, “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”  Barack Obama does not transcend principle.  He is a false god.  The persona he projected, the one many bought, is a myth, one that was persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.  The truth, for so many, didn’t matter.  By becoming “sort of God” in their eyes, he has had the power to confuse, misdirect, befog, and substitute lies for the truth.  His mendacity eludes the light because he is seen as the light.  When things have gone wrong, they have blamed the subordinates but never the conceit they created or embraced.

If we were a country where truth truly matters, then Obama’s words and actions would be more carefully measured, tested, checked and double-checked, to reveal the content of his character, to dispel the myths.  There are some who have looked for the content but have found it carefully concealed.  Peggy Noonananalyzed Obama’s identity:

Does he stand for something? I suppose he stands for many things, but you can't quite narrow it down and sum it up. A problem with his leadership is that there's always the sense that he's not quite telling you his core and motivating beliefs. There are a lot of rounded banalities. There are sentiments and impulses. But he isn't stark, doesn't vividly cut through. There's a sense he's telling people as much as he feels he can within the parameters of political safety, and no more.

Barack Obama was the fill-in-the-blank candidate.  He became what people wanted.  He reflected back people’s hopes and dreams.  He was the change they could believe in.  He was something that couldn’t exist.  He was a lie.  We didn’t know and we didn’t demand the truth of who he was before we empowered him.  Is it any surprise then that that what he says is no more truthful than what many thought he was?  Peggy Noonan also wrote this:

As for speaking truthfully, well, he speaks, in many venues and sometimes at great length. But rather than persuade the other side, he knocks down a lot of straw men and deploys no affection or regard for those who disagree with him. He says the great signature program of his presidency will do one thing and it turns out to do another. He is evasive about Benghazi and the other scandals. He winds up with polls showing Americans do not see him as a truth teller.

It is an unavoidable conclusion that Barack Obama is symbolic of America’s attitude about truth in this country.  He was elected twice.  He is symbolic evidence that truth, as a core value, is dying in American culture.  Today lies are commonplace; we have developed euphemisms for them.  They are called “narratives” and maintaining the lie is called “preserving the narrative.” “Spin” and “spin doctors” are shiny euphemisms that mask ugly deceit and deceivers.

Ironically, we are not ignorant of the lies.  As seen here, in a Gallup poll, said they do not trust Congress, and only 23% of viewers trust the mainstream media television news, the two institutions upon which we rely on for truth in leadership and information. If telling the truth is not a core, motivating principle for these institutions, then there must have been a decision penetrating their rank and file that it is somehow better to lie.  When you decide it is somehow beneficial to lie, you impair your soul.  Thomas Jefferson said:

He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world's believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good dispositions.

Later, as truth becomes less important and lies become more important, when the soul becomes tainted, especially the soul of a country…the soul of the state, then so often violence follows.  This is perhaps inevitable as the need to preserve the lie inspires ever-greater methods to suppress, rewrite, and recast the truth.  Those methods begin with the curtailment of freedom, shift to compulsion, and eventually to violence.  Today it is the IRS targeting conservative groups to curtail their financial ability to  oppose the Democrats. It is the stonewalling of subpoenas for evidence on Fast and Furious.  It is the subtle violence of the VA Scandal, where people die by inaction and the neglect is covered up by falsification because it is better, they thought, to preserve the lie that the VA Administration delivery model works.

It is a frighteningly small step from death by neglect to overt violence. 

Alexander Solzhenitsyn said:

Let us not forget that violence does not and cannot flourish by itself; it is inevitably intertwined with LYING. Between them there is the closest, the most profound and natural bond: nothing screens violence except lies, and the only way lies can hold out is by violence. Whoever has once announced violence as his METHOD must inexorably choose lying as his PRINCIPLE.

2b)

What Obama’s many messes really mean 

Dems blame . . . big government?

BY S.E. CUPP

Another week, another scandal.

From Fast and Furious at the ATF to the Pigford fraud at the Department of Agriculture, the IRS’ political targeting to the State Department’s Benghazi mess, the healthcare.gov debacle at HHS to spying at the NSA and the DOJ, President Obama is running out of agencies and departments to defend in his two years left in office.

This White House has either had the worst luck in recent memory or it is responsible for breaches of public trust so vast, it’s no wonder public faith in our government is at a record low.

And now, we must add the scandal at the Department of Veterans Affairs — one so singularly sad, offensive and disappointing it almost feels wrong to put the callous deaths of at least 40 veterans who served our country in the same category as political tax targeting. Still, in some ways it is more of the pitiful same.

There are hearings that try to coax information out of high-level bureaucrats who never seem to know enough or to tell the entire truth. Desperate finger-pointing, that Republicans must somehow be to blame, from Obama loyalists. And endless delays and stall tactics to slow-walk or withhold key information until the public tires of the exercise.

The truth Democrats don’t want you to know is that these scandals are not about racism or Republicans or obstruction votes or even President Obama.

They are about the collapse of a big-government bureaucracy that consistently lets you down, but which the left depends on to keep your vote.

If there’s anything at all funny about these scandals, it’s that Democrats don’t realize that their efforts to deflect attention away from this inconvenient truth often ends up pointing directly at it.

The problem is never at the top, they insist. The issue at the IRS wasn’t Lois Lerner or anyone else “in charge,” or their top-down directives to monitor political activity, but “low-level bureaucrats” in a Cincinnati office.

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wasn’t responsible for the Obamacare website problems; it was Canadian contractor CGI.

Never mind who gave the directive at the NSA to secretly collect metadata from millions of Americans; the real problem there is the rogue private contractor.

And Secretary Eric Shinseki has done a heckuva job at the VA, but the folks underneath him decided — totally on their own — to keep secret waiting lists.

Yes, people at the top should be held responsible when things go wrong. But at the same time, it hardly matters who that is when he or she is sitting on top of a steaming pile of bureaucratic waste.

The oversight of millions of low-level bureaucrats with unnavigable chains-of-command and arcane protocols is the problem.

The outsourcing of sensitive government work to low-level contractors in Canada and elsewhere is the problem.

The sprawling and ever-expanding surveillance state that puts our most personal information in the hands of unaccountable bureaucrats is the problem.

And, yes, money is the problem, too, but not in the way Democrats insist. The VA itself reported more than $2 billion in waste and fraud, just in 2012. The inability to manage the money these bloated bureaucracies we already have is the problem.

Big-government bureaucracy is the problem, and Democrats unintentionally tell us that all the time. But don’t take my word for it.

“The point is, we are a big country,” says self-described democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders. “The VA sees six and a half million people a year. Are people going to be treated badly? Are some people going to die because of poor treatment in the VA? Yes, that is a tragedy and we have to get to the root of it.”

Well, I think he just did.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama's Screw Up De Jour - Outing of A CIA Operative In The Field Now Announcing Our Afghanistan Withdrawal!

Yesterday's screw up de jour was The White House's outing of a CIA operative in the field. Obama no longer needs to wait to learn about his incompetence from CNN.  He now manufactures it  and announces it from  his own press room. Today's screw up is Obama's announcement telling our enemies when we will leave Afghanistan so he can claim he ended the wars, which were ongoing when he became president, by the time he leaves office Leaving  so few troops on the ground is now Obama's plan and it will accomplish nothing. Meanwhile, his premature pull out from Iraq has undone any gains we accomplished and has left that country in a continuing civil war with Iran puling some of the strings. So much for Obama's public relation approach to fighting wars. Can you guess what the next screw up will be?  Hard to tell because they are happening with such frequency! Most everything Obama does is basically nothing but posturing for political effect.  His policies are simply an extension of his political gaming.  Obama's basic incompetence and obvious disconnect from his responsibilities shows through constantly. It should be evident, for anyone capable of seeing, what a tragic mistake was made when Obama was elected and re-elected. One would think a nation as strong as America could not be unraveled in five years but he has basically accomplished his goal of disuniting and weakening  our nation and though he never intended for his administration to become  the laughing stock of the world, Obama even was able to accomplish that as well. The press and media have no rational basis for protecting him considering his many failures but they are compelled to do so because they created him and now are beholden to protect the monstrosity they suckered so many into buying. (See 1 below.) === A dear friend of mine just returned from Cuba.  I could not post his marvelous  pictures but here  is his recap. (See 2 below.) === Progress with Iran difficult and access to nuclear sites more so.  (See 3 below.) === Dick --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1)  Ron Hart: Capitalism's moral superiority to government “The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” –Margaret Thatcher Inside Barack Obama’s rhetoric of “income inequality and attack the rich,” used mainly to sway envy-driven, simple minds, is a dangerous subtext: that capitalism and entrepreneurs are bad. If this mindset continues, and without the brightest business minds in the USA, our country is doomed. Obama presupposes the evils of capitalism and capitalists to sell his statist/socialist agenda. But the facts are clear: Free-market capitalism is a far more virtuous and moral system than government. We need to separate reality from political rhetoric. Capitalism did not require $17 trillion in national debt, borrowed from future generations, to advance destructive political agendas and buy votes. If we want to talk about what is “moral” and “just,” what our government has done to us with the deficit alone would make the case. But wait – there’s more. To see the abundance that our historically free-enterprise system has bestowed on us, compare the U.S. to the rest of the world. Travel to any Third World country with a strong central government and a stranglehold on business, and witness the poverty, crime and misery spawned in places like Venezuela, North Korea and Cuba. Businesses hire people, help provide health care and other benefits, pay taxes, advertise, support local charities and build the character of a community. Like most Little League teams, my team was sponsored by business. The field had signs from Tennessee Farm Bureau Insurance and Union Carbide, examples of those “evil villains” with their 4 percent profit margins that Obama criticizes. The evil oil companies bring the fuel out of the ground and to gas stations, where they make seven cents a gallon. Government takes about 50 cents a gallon for doing nothing – not counting the cost of regulations. Then, government taxes the oil companies’ seven cents profit at 35 percent. And government calls oil companies greedy? As to the morality of capitalism, I offer the recent example of what Donald Sterling, owner of the NBA Los Angeles Clippers, has learned – and not just that duplicitous mistresses are not trusted confidantes (who knew?) – but that there are financial consequences to one’s actions. His team’s sponsors reacted quickly to his recorded rants, pulling sponsorships and sending him a clear financial message. Sterling most likely will have to sell his team. The lesson here is the ability of capitalism to enforce good behavior – quickly. Just ask Tiger Woods. His sponsor ATT pulled out on him, thus punishing him with the most expensive roaming charge in history. Compare this with the punishment that the government of Barack Obama, in his O-merica, meted out to Lois Lerner, his IRS official who targeted political opponents. He did not fire her; in fact, all the IRS folks involved got their pay. They were allowed to work or retire with full pensions and benefits. During an “investigation,” government workers get to sit at home with full pay and do nothing (kind of like the previous 20 years of their careers). It’s probably for the best; the economy operates more efficiently with fewer bureaucrats. Donald Sterling is being punished for saying something stupid, yet Joe Biden still has his job. Neither Lerner nor anyone else involved in the IRS scandal, Benghazi-gate, Secret Service hooker scandal, GSA, the VA mess or the NSA domestic spying revelations has paid any price. How, then, is government is more moral than business? Government takes by force money from people who are productive, and redistributes it to its allies. Government adds no value and produces no product. Capitalism rewards risk-taking, imagination, hard work, intellect and honesty; government does not. Under this president, government only rewards loyalty to him. As long as you do not throw Obama under the bus, you have a government job. Politicians speciously claim the moral high ground over American businesses, but we cannot cede that false argument. Businesses are more accountable and moral. They have to be, or they fail. In government, if you fail in your mission, you get more funding. Companies continue to leave the USA. Pfizer is the latest; it’s trying to relocate to another country. With an unfriendly business environment, the highest corporate tax rate in the world and Obamacare regulations looming, the U.S.’s biggest export will be visionary entrepreneurs who will start and grow new businesses elsewhere. Maybe Obama will vilify and harass them when they all move to Mexico, perhaps calling them the “Juan-percenters.” That will get his Democratic base energized. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2) " ...The speaker arrives and is Annie Betancourt, a Cuban and former State congresswoman. She gives an interesting talk, including numerous liberal comments such as negatives on Rubio. It is noted that there are 805,000 Cubans in Miami and most hate their country (leaders?) as much as the Gomez’ do as expressed last night. Dinner is second class in every way. Wednesday, May 7………………….. Up at 5:45 for our charter flight to Cuba and facing a box breakfast of no note other than ugh. Passage through Miami airport is easy as is through immigration in Cuba, after a walk over the tarmac to reach it. Our 23 passengers load the bus. We meet our Tour Guide Jose Luis Sande and he provides introductory comments as we are bussed to Plaza de la Revolution. The square was built by Castro to allow large crowds to hear him speak. There Susana has her picture taken with the background of the Ché Guevara office building. Next is a tour of the Colon Cemetery, a large 140 acre and old place which is well maintained containing not only the wealthy but paupers as well. The Guide for the cemetery is quite good and provides a window into that which Cuba considers its main industry - tourism. The cemetery houses the firefighters who died in a fire in 1890 and those Americans who died on the Maine in 1898, yet a year later they were disinterred and brought back to the United States. We have lunch at La Casa Española. At our table are the Davis family, Leonard and Norma, an attractive couple from Charleston, he a dentist and friend of Savannah and Ariel member Walter and Linda Evans. We then go to the JEA to watch a ballet dance by the independent MalPaso Danse Company, under the artistic leadership of Osnel Delgado. This group is but a couple of years old and preparing for an engagement in New York. They are all in late 20s early 30s and dance well. They are articulate in a Q & A session afterwards. The building in which they practice contains a small Holocaust museum. Our bus is from the government fleet “Transtur”, number 430, again part of the Cuban emphasis on tourism. The driver is named Manuel and he stays with us the entire trip. Now we can go to the Nacional Hotel as our rooms will be ready. Built in 1930 and a national treasure which has housed many famous Hollywood stars and many gangsters, who owned the Tropicana and much else leading to the Castro uprising in 1959. www.hotelnacionaldecuba.com with double rooms at $200, but probably discounted for us. There as usual we have a welcome Mojito and small talk on the hotel’s past. Our Landings fellow traveler is in the foreground - Mary Kistler. The hotel has a beautiful lobby with a dining room at one end and meeting rooms at the other. The extensive courtyard has wonderful outdoor furniture of rattan, band music, a bar, the occasional fashion show, peacocks and a restaurant for al fresco dining. In this al fresco setting at the Vista del Golfo I see entering a nice looking couple resembling some Woodberry friends from North Carolina but I decline to approach them. Later in the elevator to our room this possible North Carolinian is there and I ask if he is. Susana answers a question and he says, “You are from Uruguay”. She responds as does he in Spanish and it turns out he is Tom Dodd, Jr. of Connecticut (appointed by Clinton) and the former Ambassador to Uruguay. His wife is ill and he is returning to the mainland with her. What a world of coincidence. Our room is comfortable with twin queen beds. However, we have been warned that sewer facilities leave much to be desired in Cuba and we are instructed to put papers in the waste basket, not the toilet. Thursday, May 8……………………… Breakfast is a typical buffet with an interesting addition, a multi item drink machine where one can get water, coffee, café con leche, and cappuccino by button selection. We have a lecture by architect Professor Miguel Coyuela which is entitled Havana, Past, Present and Future. He informs us that Cuba had the first aqueduct built in the Americas. El Morro was built in 1565, but in building the walled fort, they neglected the far side of the bay into which in 1762 the British came and occupied the city. The sugar trade built the cobblestone streets as the stones came from Massachusetts as ballast, much as they had come from England. The 1750s sent children to European schools (not those in Spain), The Cuban Indians were not aggressive as in Uruguay and unlike Brasil. The train system in Cuba was the 5th in the world and used Irish and Chinese workers. In 1880 they were first in sugar worldwide and 1920-1960 was their ‘fat cow’ period. Money laundering abounded with the mob hotel/ club ownership. We had packed some “donation” items and now turn them over to the Tour Director. The day is a killer as we walk four squares - Cathedral, Armas, Vieja and San Francisco Assisi, and face other efforts. The first is Cathedral Square, which has undergone rehab. In this square are numerous families living in a room or so above the first level shops. Also are found the ubiquitous seekers of fortune, one of whom puts at Susana’s insistence a kiss on my cheek which requires several hours of scrubbing to remove. The importunate beggars are not obnoxious as in some countries, but just ask and then disappear. We stop at an artisan shop and watch individuals either creating the drawing or reproducing diverse approaches including coloration on that drawing or etching. The next walk and stop is in the Plaza de Armas. This is a nice and attractive plaza with book stalls set up as this is Sunday. Plaza de Armas with citizen’s living quarters above the official spaces, a piece of the city fort and a church turned museum. We eat lunch in the Plaza de Armas where a typical small band of drum, guitar, flute and singer are playing softly. The internationally known dancer, Susana Bourland, is asked to perform in dancing with the leader and she does, with her normal charm. With ever flagging strength we walk on to the Plaza Vieja, passing many attractive alleyways and eating places. The country is teeming with entrepreneurs from horse drawn carriages to pedicabs obviously hammered out of bicycle parts to person pulled wagons to street and flea market tables to this young man found in many places in the world - here, to earn a living any way you can. Plaza Vieja has undergone considerable rehabilitation as can be seen in the side-by-side pictures below that of the Plaza if one looks closely at the before and after notice on the left side of the building. Again a rather long walk to the final plaza, the Plaza de San Francisco Assisi. Here the church has a trompe l’oeil which is difficult to see but is said to contain numerous scenes in the life of Christ appropriate for a church alter. Street vendors are hawking cinnamon chiviricos in the plaza. They are delicious. We walk still farther in Old Havana to meet with four youngsters in their 20s who are working as a graphics group in what is called a People to People Connection. we break into four groups to meet with them and my group calls for Judi Rodriquez (ogrodriquez@intomed.slc.cu). She is married to one of the others but she is clearly the brightest of the group. While we have been told by many that the average salary for a Cuban is $30 a day, or 25 CUCs, or converted pesos, we learn an entrepreneur can do much better with luck and hard work. Judi has 3 employees who man 3 jewelry tables in a sort of flea market near the Nacional Hotel. She declares each makes 50 CUCs a day and she makes between 50-100. Her business problem is managing the suppliers who make the jewels and who often do not succeed in deliveries. She says she is stressed. She is married and they often put TV episodes like Friends on a thumb drive and take it to a friend’s house for entertainment on their computer. She has a computer but does not know Excel and carries the business in her head.There do not appear to be any business incubators in Cuba to help what I see as many, many entrepreneurs. No one hands out business cards until asked and then not everyone has one. In the bus back to the hotel we pass La Floridita or Hemingway’s old favorite restaurant in which I had a sandwich in 1954. After showers to erase a difficult but interesting day, we eat at El Aljibe. One can see the traditional Cuban fare which we had nearly every lunch and dinner except as later described - that is, chicken (or pork or beef pulled), rice and beans, a small and inadequate salad and a small dessert usually flan or ice cream, with a choice of water, coca or cerveza to drink. It wasn’t bad, but it was too consistently served. We yearned for variety on the menu. Friday, May 9…………………….. We attend breakfast and feast on an omelet and too-soft cinnamon buns, and yet great coffee as in cappuccino. Our lecture today is given by Professor and former Ambassador to Japan and Argentina Carlos Alzugaray Treto and is entitled U.S. and Cuban Relations. He observed John Adams referred to Cuba as ripe fruit meaning we don’t want it now but when it falls. The city of Havana was built between 1900 and 1960 and little done after. Most of the housing stock is private but they can not sell. From 1972 to 1990 was the Russian Period, in which most of the block housing was erected. The next 3 years are called the Special Period which was not pleasant as Russia pulled out of everything. Today there is considerable restoration underway with much concentrated on shops and restaurants. As to population, 20% are over 60; 28% have a college degree and there is a fear of a brain drain. Money from the U.S. is 5 to1 when the average salary is $25 daily. Sugar is down, tourism is up. (Humans are the only animal that stumbles over the same stone twice). Today we visit the Fortaleza de San Carlos de la Cabana, usually referred to as “La Cabana”. This fort protected the mouth of Havana harbor in its day and this weekend is offering a festival to celebrate tourism. There is a great deal of music, costumed gays and others, and many food stands. On the left the green trees in the background front the Hotel Nacional. On the right side and over Susana’s right shoulder are the Plazas we visited yesterday. We travel to Hemingway’s estate, The Lookout ….Finca La Vigia. He bought it for 80,000 pesos (old or new?) and we agree we could live there in a minute. It is a wonderfully comfortable home, perched on a hill, with a guest house and lush vegetation, a swimming pool and a boat dock with no visible means of reaching water. and the pool and boat ….. from Islands in the Stream We have lunch in an open air restaurant called Finca Alcona in Managua. I eat the appetizers of cold cuts, bread and pineapple and the dessert as I tire of the black beans etc etc. The restaurant is fun, however, as in an attached section there is another party and some go there to dance to their music, and wouldn’t you know the star is Susana. We ride to a hospice near the San Låzaro Church run by the Sisters of Charity to house and care for those afflicted with leprosy. We ride back to Managua where José Luis resides and visit a school conducted by his wife where English and music are taught. Our group is split up and each talks with a student to provide practice with their English…... ….and then we listened to a guitar serenade from the music group. DInner that night is in a “paladar”, or home based restaurant as an entrepreneurial effort where I expected a couple of bridge tables in a living room, but no, this is a fully furnished and decorated restaurant on the bottom floor(s) of a home. Susana has declined to go in order to rest for the late night and I am asked to join the Saunders, Rusty and Carol, who are celebrating their 40th. He is a lawyer and she a college Dean in Orlando who specializes in IT management training. That night we attend “Cubano Cubano”, a night club act in the Parisien Room of the Nacional Hotel. It is no Paris Moulin Rouge, nor a Cuba Tropicana which I saw in 1954, but a good two hours of non-stop music and dancing. Saturday, May 10……………………... We have our third professional lecturer, Maritza Corrales, who is a former Cultural Minister and her talk is on religion, she jewish, her husband catholic. It is not a particularly interesting talk and she fails to note the diminishing role of religion in the lives of the world’s people. We first go to a catholic church to hear a choir of very young people. In the audience are many proud mothers and a few holding their child’s instrument whether violin or sax. I am totally impressed with its 21 year old conductor as her enthusiasm radiates, her professionalism is pronounced. I tell her so with my hand and a couple of words and then have Susana tell her in Spanish. She seems pleased. Lunch for the day is at La California Bar and Restaurant, another paladar. Once again it is not a bridge table in a living room but a fully decorated restaurant established by an entrepreneur. Their pizza is terrific and their pasta eatable. Next we visit the Museo de Belles Artes de Havana. It requires much effort on a day when the air conditioner is taking a Cuban holiday, so I walk six or seven galleries and allow the rest of the group to go up another floor. I in the meantime return to the first piso and drink a coke. We visit a home of another guide of “a middle class family”, whose daughter has just passed the tests to become a Guide. She is 28, attractive, educated and speaks English well. It is interesting to note that many of the people we have met and groups we have visited appear to have connections to José Luis and I might guess receive from Road Scholar tips of some sort. I am told these do not get reported. The home in which we meet is let’s say middle class and better than its neighbors. The father is 40 and a auto mechanic who owns his own business. Since parts are a problem, he scavenges but also has the machinery to makes certain parts. He has four employees and pays taxes. One of his employees is his daughter’s former boyfriend. The current boyfriend is with us and he too is an entrepreneur. We are served coffee and have an interesting Q&A. Many Americans remark on the old cars still running in Cuba, see right in one case, and perhaps this is due to father’s shop. There are indeed many of these cars running about. We have the evening free and choose to dine in the Hotel’s restaurant. It is well decorated, has a piano player and serve an excellent filet and potato. It is the best meal we have in Cuba. It is early to bed as we have a bags-out at 7:45 for trip to Cienfuegos. Sunday, May 11…………………. We bus to Cienfuegos, but first stop at Playa Larga, which is a national park. A park ranger gives a talk which discloses there are some 50 such in the country. Here they have a crocodile which is a hybrid of an American and a Cuban. We go down to the beach where part of the Bay of Pigs invasion was executed. The water is warm and several of the group swim. We are at the Hostal Enrique, www.enrique-hostal.tuars.com, for lunch. Again this is a paladar B & B opened by an entrepreneur and they serve an excellent meal although similar to most others. There are many B & Bs in this small town and all painted in colorful pastels. The Giron Museo is next which houses the Cuban version of the Bay of Pigs, with their weaponry and heros properly pictured. As we continue on to Cienfuegos, we see a half-dozen men in the road. There is about a half-mile of white/yellow stuff laid out beyond them. It turns out to be a fascinating harvest methodology. Cubans harvest rice, then lay it out on a paved road and allow it to dry over three or four days. If it rains, unlikely, but see them run. Workers are then armed with brooms, shovels and plastic bags into which they load the rice. Trucks then take the bags to market. The workers are as fascinated with us as we with them. See below. As we drive into Cienfuegos, it is readily evident this town has withstood the ravages of time and revolution better than Havana. Arriving in Cienfuegos, founded in 1819, the first stop is Plaza de Jose Marti. The town was settled by the French coming from New Orleans, LA and has a distinct French feel. We visit an old theatre, the Tomas Terry Theatre. Next we visit another school where dance and music are the subjects of emphasis. The children in the 3-12 range perform numerous dances with both male and female performers. The highlight is she with the smile. On now to our hotel for the balance of the trip, The Hotel Jagua in the Punta Gorda section of town. It is a wonderful hotel from the ‘50s, light and open and with the best view in my travels or at home. www.grancaribe. com/english/hotel.asp?hotel_code=SCTGCJagua#rooms We take a picture on the malecon and the view continues outstanding. Fidel Castro stayed in room 614 - we in Room 609. Dinner is in the hotel and is unworthy of comment, both as to food and service. Monday, May 12 ………………….. The day starts with a visit to the Benny More Arts School and their faculty and students, some 250 in number. The school prefers young students with no experience but apparent talent. It is said 80% make it to the professional level. True, we have seen music groups everywhere we go and much art hangs nearby. We admire a dance group of 10-13 year olds and they are excellent. Then musicians play sax and flute, also excellent. The art teachers are next: We are all impressed with the administration, the teachers and the students in this fine school We will see many graduates later on the trip. The city of Trinidad is next and is a colonial city. First stop is for lunch at the Restaurant Plaza Mayor which has a very decent buffet in an open air building. There is music on the way to this eatery (as nearly everywhere we turn on the trip) ,,,,,,, ….and indeed within the restaurant. The flutist is pretty and causes me to buy a CD of their work. Trinidad was founded in 1514 and considered the crown jewel of the colonial cities. It is colorful and well preserved. We go to the 200 year old home of a wonderful couple the wife of which is the most enthusiastic person we have ever met. They are musicians who recently bought this home and have turned it into a B&B in which I would stay on return. As we walk the street of Trinidad to shop and sight-see, we pass the inheritance from Spain of a cochino on a spit and a guitar nearby. But we are not to partake until the last night in the country. The room in the Hotel Jagua is comfortable and reasonably appointed, and as remarked earlier with a view of consequence. The town is wonderful but there is not much to do other than take the sun on a beach and try out all the restaurants and listen to music. Shower before dinner and determine we have been turning the faucet in the wrong direction to get the cold water we so complained about. Embarrassing. Returning to Cienfuegos we eat at a paladar on the malecon entitled Villa Legarto. It is a nice hotel with a good restaurant in a covered veranda, well served and plentiful. We take a pedicab back to the hotel and banter with the driver and his competitors with Susana relinquishing some of her donations. Tuesday, May 15 ……………………….. First stop of the day is in a rations store. In their form of food stamps Cubans used to receive a month’s worth of food, restricted in nature but sufficient for life. In the interim the amount has been reduced to 1.5 weeks. They go to a ration store with their assigned book of record and there decide what they want based on price and the allotment is provided by the operator of the store. The former being a closed market, we next visit an open and public farmer’s market, which is similar to one in the U.S. Here one can purchase those rather few vegetables found in Cuba, meats, fruits and items desired by the household. The general landscape of Cuba which would have fertile soil is remarkably bereft of farms. Clearly they produce sufficient for their own needs, but there would be little for export. What an opportunity when and if the barricade is broken. We travel to Santa Clara and the first stop is a senior citizens home where we see a most lively group of seniors, some who have found mates and many who dance, sing and play sports. They have a game with a stick and a piece of wood and play ‘hit the wood’ and measure the distance to determine the winner. I get a chance to display my athleticism and ….. fail miserably. It is embarrassing. Santa Clara is the home of Ché Guevara and the memorial to and burial grounds of his remains. The town is well preserved and we tour a bit, locating a man sitting in the park who becomes the recipient of a shirt I have grown to dislike but he appears to love. The memorial is enormous. The enclosed portion is treated by all as holy and well respected. This concludes the visit to Santa Clara and we return to Cienfuegos for our final dinner together. Another view from the room in the hotel is of a lovely old mansion, which will provide our dinner for the evening under the trees in its courtyard. The dinner is spectacular as it is roasted pig instead of the pulled pork we have so far been provided. It is surely copied from the Botin restaurant in Madrid. Our compliments cause the management to ask Susana as our only Spanish speaker to sign the guest book with comments. The next day we fly out of Cienfuegos to Miami with a group picture in the airport. A map of our travel out of Havana follows: One major highlight of the trip was in seeing the Cantores de Cienfuegos. To this point we have seen many young performing arts children, but no adults. I wondered if these students had any professional opportunity as we had not seen them. This Cantores choral group of 20-30s years old have a magnificent future ahead of them. They are coming to the U.S. in the fall, sponsored by Road Scholar. Found at www.cantoresdecienfuegos@yahoo.com. Many had attended the Benny More School. Honey Moreira is their Directora. Comments on Cuba. They are a friendly nation, tired of their government, grateful for the $200k to 1,000K sent each year from relatives in the U.S. which permits some just to live and others to begin the entrepreneurial process. That process is very visible as we saw many casa particulars or paradars or home owner restaurants; many pedicabs fashioned out of who knows what parts; horse drawn transports; flea market sellers; small cabs about the size of ! a VW bug but new and costing I would guess $1,000. There were many others but it is clearly a flood waiting for better U.S. relations and a change in government. A humorous comment provided that the government pretends to pay, while the people pretend to work. Our guide disclosed the following which describes much. He is a well paid Cuban by their standards who has never been out of the country. He has a college degree which he got for free but in turn gave two years in ‘social assistance’. He speaks from college excellent English and translates perfectly with no alterations. He lives with his wife’s parents - this a choice based on a comparison to his own -and his two children, a divorced Aunt of his wife who has two children. So 9 in the small house. He is the major bread winner and accepts that he pays most bills. When he wanted to add a room, kitchen and bath addition to the house for his family’s privacy, a building inspector found out and made him stop. He found a friend who knew the inspector, who in turn invited all for a drink and “whatever”. The inspector never returned. The addition was completed. So there is a lot of petty bribery in order to live and under-reporting of income such as tips. Those not in want sell their food stamps at a reduced price, thus getting money for themselves and improved rations for the receiver. Much of 100 year old Havana is crumbling, yet it provides cheap housing for many. There is an active and thoughtful reclamation underway. In the better parts of Havana it appears much as it did in its hay day and much is truly beautiful. Trinidad and Santa Clara are still original and lovely. We saw no manufacturing and little agriculture. Old factories we passed were old sugar mills. The only identified manufacturing was sugar, cigars and an as yet untapped oil reserve off the western coast. Cuba to me was a warm, friendly, music oriented people and many with a great sense of humor." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Despite nuclear probe progress, IAEA access to key Iran site elusive  The U.N. nuclear watchdog appears no closer to finding out what happened at a military site at the centre of its investigation into suspected atom bomb research by Iran, despite signs Tehran is becoming more cooperative. A confidential report by the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran for the first time in years had begun engaging with a long-stymied IAEA inquiry into allegations that it may have worked on designing a nuclear weapon. But any hope that Iran may be ready to fully address concerns about its nuclear activities will be tempered as long as it refuses to give the U.N. agency access to a location at the Parchin base southeast of Tehran, and information about it. U.S. officials say it is vital for Iran to answer IAEA questions if Washington and five other powers are to reach a broader nuclear settlement with Iran by a self-imposed deadline of July 20. However, Tehran's repeated denials of any nuclear bomb aspirations will make it hard for it to admit to any wrongdoing in the past without losing face. The IAEA report issued to member states late on Friday said satellite images showed “ongoing construction activities” at Parchin, a finding that could add to Western suspicions that Iran has been trying to hide any incriminating evidence of illicit nuclear-related experiments there. “It seems clear that there is more sanitisation going on,” one Western envoy said, noting indications of major alteration work at Parchin since early 2012, such as soil removal and asphalting of the specific place the IAEA wants to see. “I can think of no other explanation for 28 months of cleanup and denied IAEA access at Parchin except an attempt to hide all traces of something from IAEA environmental sampling.” The IAEA, which has requested Parchin access for more than two years, says it has information that Iran built a large steel chamber there for explosives tests, possibly more than a decade ago. It said back in 2011 that “such experiments would be strong indicators of possible nuclear weapon development”. Iran denies Western suspicions that it has been seeking to develop the capability to assemble nuclear weapons. It says Parchin is a conventional military facility and has dismissed the cleansing allegations. “The activity at Parchin gives ample reason for continued concern that Iran may be trying to remove any remaining vestiges of nuclear-related experiments,” said Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the non-proliferation program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think-tank in London. But one should not leap to conclusions of guilt, he added. “The activity may also be for some entirely innocuous purpose.” IRANIAN COOPERATION “IMPROVING” The IAEA's suspicions about Parchin were part of a 2011 report that included a trove of intelligence information pointing to Iranian research in the past that could be relevant for nuclear weapons, some of which it said may be continuing. Iran says it was based on false and baseless information. But it has offered to work with the IAEA to clear up the case since pragmatist Hassan Rouhani won the presidency last year, pledging to end Tehran's international isolation. The IAEA-Iran talks are separate from those between Tehran and the United States, France, Germany, Britain, China and Russia. But they are complementary as both focus on fears that Iran may covertly be using a nuclear power and research programme as a cover for developing a weapons capability. Friday's IAEA report said Iran had started engaging on one issue in the investigation, by providing explanations about the development of detonators that can, among other things, be used to set of an atomic explosive device. It also agreed last week to provide the IAEA with information in two other areas of the inquiry, including allegations about the initiation of high explosives. “The engagement and cooperation (shown by Iran) has been improving all the time,” a senior diplomat said. But the IAEA report showed little progress so far regarding Parchin, saying the U.N. agency continues to seek answers to “detailed questions” submitted to Iran about it. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It said the activities it had noticed “appear to show the removal/replacement or refurbishment of the external wall structures of the site’s two main buildings”. The alleged test chamber was believed to have been constructed in one of them.